When my husband & his first wife divorced in 2002 the child support order indicated that when he is laid off the support payments would temporarily abate until he resumed work (he is a constuction worker in chicago). Whenever he has gotten laid off, the payments stopped, they did not come out of his unemployment. Whenever he resumed work, he paid the current support as well as a portion to go towards the rearage. Today his ex took him to court to have the order revised. She wants the support to come out whether he is working or not. The judge gave us a continuance until next month.
Can this order be reversed even though both up them signed the agreement that the payments would proceed in this fashion? Can one judge reverse another's decision?